↓ Skip to main content

Visual analogue scale (VAS) as a monitoring tool for daily changes in asthma symptoms in adolescents: a prospective study

Overview of attention for article published in Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Visual analogue scale (VAS) as a monitoring tool for daily changes in asthma symptoms in adolescents: a prospective study
Published in
Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13223-017-0196-7
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Success in asthma management hinges on patients' competency to detect and respond to ever-changing symptom severity. Thus, it is crucial to have reliable, simple, and sustainable methods of symptom monitoring that can be readily incorporated into daily life. Although visual analogue scale (VAS) has been considered as a simple symptom assessment method, its utility as a daily symptom monitoring tool in adolescents is unknown. This study was to determine the concurrent validity of VAS in capturing diurnal changes in symptoms and to examine the relationships between VAS and asthma control and pulmonary function. Forty-two adolescents (12-17 years old) with asthma completed daily assessment of symptoms twice per day, morning and bedtime, for a week using VAS and 6-item symptom diary concurrently. Asthma control was measured at enrollment and 6 month later, and spirometry was conducted at enrollment. Pearson correlations, multilevel modeling and regression were conducted to assess the relationships between VAS and symptom diary, asthma control and FEV1. Morning and evening VAS was positively associated with symptom diary items of each corresponding time frame of the day (r = 0.41-0.58, p < 0.0001). Morning VAS was significantly predicted by morning diary data reflecting nocturnal wakening (β = 2.13, p = 0.033) and morning symptoms (β = 4.09, p = 0.002), accounting for 57% of the total variance of morning VAS. Similarly, changes in four evening diary items, particularly shortness of breath (β = 2.60, p = 0.028), significantly predicted changes in evening VAS, accounting for 55% of the total variance. Average VAS scores correlated with asthma control (r = 0.65, p < 0.001) and FEV1 (r = -0.38, p = 0.029), and were predictive of asthma control 6 months later (β = 0.085, p = 0.006). VAS is a valid tool capturing diurnal changes in symptoms reflected in a multi-item symptom diary. Moreover, VAS is a valid measure predicting concurrent and future asthma control. The findings suggest VAS can be a simple alternative to daily dairies for daily symptom monitoring, which can provide invaluable information about current and future asthma control without substantially increasing self-monitoring burdens for adolescent patients. Clinical Trial Registration NCT01696357. Registered 18 September 2012.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Student > Master 6 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 8%
Researcher 3 6%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 20 42%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 13%
Computer Science 3 6%
Psychology 1 2%
Design 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 22 46%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 May 2017.
All research outputs
#19,641,611
of 32,051,844 outputs
Outputs from Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology
#574
of 994 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#184,746
of 343,764 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology
#4
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,051,844 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 994 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 343,764 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.